Scrap is NCR or not - What regulation

Go to page

Registered

Can someone point me to a regulation (specific clause) that talks about scrap as being recorded as NCR? Why do we have to document scrap as non-conformance as it is anyways going to be dispositioned as "reject"?

Fully retired...

Can someone point me to a regulation (specific clause) that talks about scrap as being recorded as NCR? Why do we have to document scrap as non-conformance as it is anyways going to be dispositioned as "reject"?

Can someone point me to a regulation (specific clause) that talks about scrap as being recorded as NCR? Why do we have to document scrap as non-conformance as it is anyways going to be dispositioned as "reject"?

I am also not certain I understand the question. Correct me if I'm misinterpreting, but it appears you have the order-of-events backwards.

Correct:
1. Item is determined to be non-conforming
2. Disposition decision is made to scrap the item

Incorrect:
1. Item is determined to be scrap
2. Decision is made whether or not the item is non-conforming

The main purpose of logging NCRs is to document a) that a non-conformance was identified (what & when); and b) what was done with it (disposition). As John points out, this can yield valuable data and opportunities for improvement.

Registered

Correct:
1. Item is determined to be non-conforming
2. Disposition decision is made to scrap the item

This is the standard practice in our company except documenting the NCR is considered an expensive exercise and people question if there is a regulation that states clearly if scrap also needs to be documented. If there is some SW like MES that indicates scrap rate that should be enough for keeping metrics on scrap. The documentation for NCR seems unnecessary.

Looking for Reality

1. Item is determined to be non-conforming
- Measurment is made
- Gathered data is compared to acceptance Criteria
- Documentation of whether part is acceptable or not
- If acceptable...move along the process
- If not acceptable...NCR (This comes BEFORE decision for disposition)

2. Disposition decision is made to scrap the item
- NCR already exists
- Disposition decision is made to scrap the item
- Document this decision...likely right on the NCR that already exists.

Rewording the question you are asking (simply to highlight the backwards order)...Do we have to determine whether a part is acceptable or not before we choose to scrap it?
The answer to this will always be "Yes"...
and the NCR happens before disposition decisions are made...before the word "Scrap" ever shows up.

A problem shared...

Correct:
1. Item is determined to be non-conforming
2. Disposition decision is made to scrap the item

This is the standard practice in our company except documenting the NCR is considered an expensive exercise and people question if there is a regulation that states clearly if scrap also needs to be documented. If there is some SW like MES that indicates scrap rate that should be enough for keeping metrics on scrap. The documentation for NCR seems unnecessary.

Of course! If people are not held accountable for documenting the scrap they can't be held responsible for it! Anyone who is trying to hide behind needing a regulation doesn't want to be "found out" that the process they are responsible for is costing the organization money. Once they start recording what causes scrap, then they may see it's actually NOT their problem, but may in fact be caused by another process. But whatever happens, management are not serious about doing anything until non-conforming product - which becomes scrap - is accounted for. "What gets measured gets managed"...

Post Responsibly

Agree wholeheartedly with Andy and John. The hidden agenda behind the resistance to document scrap is asymptomatic of a major dysfunction. Any organization that resists the basic notion of documenting rejected and dispositioned as scrap product is playing silly games.

Why do you have to document the NCR? To make decisions based on facts. Factual approach to decision making. Without records you don’t have data. Without data, you are managing by gut feel.

Documenting nonconforming products is one of the most basic, early steps in any organization journey of establishing a quality system. Without a solid foundation, an organization never builds itself any higher.

Quality and Auditing Expert

This is the standard practice in our company except documenting the NCR is considered an expensive exercise and people question if there is a regulation that states clearly if scrap also needs to be documented. If there is some SW like MES that indicates scrap rate that should be enough for keeping metrics on scrap. The documentation for NCR seems unnecessary.

We could argue that scrap is more expensive than solving the problems.

Certainly scrap rates should be noted, so you can address the "vital few." But how long do you want to wait to actually solve the problems? Scrap represents piles of money in boxes or on the floor. We should not need a regulation to try to save money.